Reading mode: Light Dark

Can´t shoot anymore because of DR problem

Go to last post
Horshack said:
Critt82 said:
I don't understand the need for sarcasm that I see so much in these forums.

More dynamic range is a good thing. More resolution is a good thing. Sometimes its necessary to shoot at high ISO. (Astrophotographers like myself do this most of the time) Yet people are constantly poking fun at people for coming to a hardware review site and looking for the best hardware.

I don't get it.
Click to expand...
Many are probably tired of hearing about DR. I used to post a lot about it but grew bored of the discussions. I have a few Exmor-based cameras but still shoot with three 5Dc bodies on a regular basis, which are considerably worse than more recent Canon bodies. Part of the reason I still use the 5Dc is Magic Lantern's awesome bracketing support, which allows up to 9 shots with any EV gap configuration. That works great for most of my landscape work but occasionally the merging can be a real pain when I shoot water or fast moving clouds - I scan spend up to 30 minutes trying to manually bend, like the images below due to fast-moving clouds:
Click to expand...
Great shots and fine examples of how to sensibly use HDR techniques / multi shot blending.


---------------------------------------------
Waldemar
www.pbase.com/haak
 
rrccad said:
Critt82 said:
I don't understand the need for sarcasm that I see so much in these forums.

More dynamic range is a good thing. More resolution is a good thing. Sometimes its necessary to shoot at high ISO. (Astrophotographers like myself do this most of the time)
Click to expand...
really? most astrophotographers I know shoot at pretty low ISO's
Click to expand...
Well I don't. If you are interested and live in the mid wisconsin area I am teaching a class on Astrophotography next month. More can be found out about it on my website http://www.craigpilecky.com



Here is a recent shot I did. ISO 6,400 shot with a Canon 6D and Rokinon 35mm F/1.4.



d7113d36374d4ba68babee743fdc450b.jpg
 
critt892 said:
rrccad said:
Critt82 said:
I don't understand the need for sarcasm that I see so much in these forums.

More dynamic range is a good thing. More resolution is a good thing. Sometimes its necessary to shoot at high ISO. (Astrophotographers like myself do this most of the time)
Click to expand...
really? most astrophotographers I know shoot at pretty low ISO's
Click to expand...
Well I don't. If you are interested and live in the mid wisconsin area I am teaching a class on Astrophotography next month. More can be found out about it on my website http://www.craigpilecky.com
Click to expand...
sorry, I consider that astronightscapes, and certainly not astrophotography. wonderful landscapes though.

and yes, since you're not using any astrophotography related tools such as tracking mounts, etc - higher ISO is most certainly necessary. less with longer exposure and/or stacking and tiling.
 
Last edited:
...(at the highlight end and "toed" at the shadowed end) allowing for a gentler transition from the mid-tones to total under- and overexposure compared to the linear response of digital, which clips abruptly and unceremoniously, particularly visible at the highlight end. That's why transparency film, despite its limited latitude, delivers such satisfying images when well-exposed. Part of the value of greater dynamic range in a digital sensor is that, if one is judicious about protecting significant highlight information, it allows simulation of the shouldered response of film while still having sufficient stops of mid-tone information for a satisfying rendition of the subject matter.

Characteristic curves of transparency films
 
I suspect high ISO is used to keep exposure times brief enough to avoid blurring of stars?
 
Kabe Luna said:
I suspect high ISO is used to keep exposure times brief enough to avoid blurring of stars?

--
// / / / / /
GARLAND CARY Photo+Design
garlandcary.photography
Click to expand...
Correct. I always follow the rule of 500 for calculating exposure. So since I was shooting at 35mm on a FF body I kept exposure times to 13 seconds.

I probably could have done the shoot at ISO 3,200 but I figure as long as im not blowing detail by overexposing its better to go with the higher ISO. The Rokinon 35mm f/1.4 is amazing for photographing the night sky!!! I cannot recommend that lens enough. I also recommend a panning base for your tripod, and to be sure the tripod legs have a level so when doing multi-shot stitches it doesn't start sloping on you.
 
Last edited:
Waldemar said:
I have the Canon 5D MK II and was rather happy with it until recently.

Now that I know that Nikon has this tremendous DR advantage I have a total blockade.

I can´t shoot a single frame anymore. Most certainly the meagre DR will ruin this shot and anyway it won´t look half as good as when made with a Nikon and all my friends will ask me when looking at my holidays, dog, cat, kids and treetrunks pics, hey, what´s wrong with your camera, the pics all look like sh... and also the highlights are all totally blown and the shadows totally blocked on this incredible shot of the bumper of your car at high noon yesterday!

Man, I need 50 MP and 20 stops DR right now, or I´m totally doomed!

If only I already had a Nikon instead of a 7 stops poop slide film when I went to Italy the other year!

---------------------------------------------
Waldemar
www.pbase.com/haak
Click to expand...
The only DR you need is one specializing in mental problems.

Unless you already have one. In which case you need to let them know that you are off your meds.
 
Nice. But you still shot it with a Canon. ;-)

critt892 said:
rrccad said:
Critt82 said:
I don't understand the need for sarcasm that I see so much in these forums.

More dynamic range is a good thing. More resolution is a good thing. Sometimes its necessary to shoot at high ISO. (Astrophotographers like myself do this most of the time)
Click to expand...
really? most astrophotographers I know shoot at pretty low ISO's
Click to expand...
Well I don't. If you are interested and live in the mid wisconsin area I am teaching a class on Astrophotography next month. More can be found out about it on my website http://www.craigpilecky.com

Here is a recent shot I did. ISO 6,400 shot with a Canon 6D and Rokinon 35mm F/1.4.

d7113d36374d4ba68babee743fdc450b.jpg
Click to expand...


--
Some favourite pics:
garyp.zenfolio.com

Favourites

Gary Pollard
garyp.zenfolio.com
 
Waldemar said:
I have the Canon 5D MK II and was rather happy with it until recently.

Now that I know that Nikon has this tremendous DR advantage I have a total blockade.

If only I already had a Nikon instead of a 7 stops poop slide film when I went to Italy the other year!

---------------------------------------------
Waldemar
www.pbase.com/haak
Click to expand...
I have a feeling you work for Nikon! Just kidding.

My Nikon D800's HDR feature is great for me since I do not bother shooting in RAW and doing post processing. I am ignorant about the power of post processing software, I wonder if shooting in RAW and doing post processing solve your DR want?
 
Because of Canon's poor DR I've had to give up shooting test patterns. I feel a terrible sense of loss.
 
Critt82 said:
I don't understand the need for sarcasm that I see so much in these forums.

More dynamic range is a good thing. More resolution is a good thing. Sometimes its necessary to shoot at high ISO. (Astrophotographers like myself do this most of the time) Yet people are constantly poking fun at people for coming to a hardware review site and looking for the best hardware.

I don't get it.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is making fun of those who want the best that they can get. Too many, however make a mountain out of a mole hill & act like a camera such as the 5D lll is not a capable tool, when it is much more capable a tool than most of us are as photographers. This is a gear site & everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. They are also entitled to buy something else if they are unhappy with what they own. I think the sarcasm comes in when some feel it is important to their ego to knock everyone who owns & likes something different than the equipment they have. Bab
 
Kabe Luna said:
...(at the highlight end and "toed" at the shadowed end) allowing for a gentler transition from the mid-tones to total under- and overexposure compared to the linear response of digital, which clips abruptly and unceremoniously, particularly visible at the highlight end. That's why transparency film, despite its limited latitude, delivers such satisfying images when well-exposed. Part of the value of greater dynamic range in a digital sensor is that, if one is judicious about protecting significant highlight information, it allows simulation of the shouldered response of film while still having sufficient stops of mid-tone information for a satisfying rendition of the subject matter.

Characteristic curves of transparency films

--
// / / / / /
GARLAND CARY Photo+Design
garlandcary.photography
Click to expand...
That's exactly right, Kabe Luna. Very well understood, and stated. Your lower tones will still be shot noise limited, but that might be all right, and a worthy tradeoff for a nice transition to highlights, as opposed to clipped ones.

-Rishi
 
Ha, ha! good one. Only thing is, these new 50Mp cams have the same DR as the MIII, according to Canon that is. Won't help?

Besides, unless the pics are for commercial usage, who cares.
 
clager said:
Ha, ha! good one. Only thing is, these new 50Mp cams have the same DR as the MIII, according to Canon that is. Won't help?

Besides, unless the pics are for commercial usage, who cares.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that´s a real bummer. Gonna put the 5Ds and the D750 together in a microwave and see what happens. Something will.


---------------------------------------------
Waldemar
www.pbase.com/haak
 
I haven't been able to shoot these images since moving to digital. I mostly shoot when traveling, so it's all handheld. I'm a big fan of Canon, but this area of the product does indeed need improvement.

Jack
 
Ha ha good one
 
So what is the point of this post. Silly me....why I am even responding............

Waldemar said:
I have the Canon 5D MK II and was rather happy with it until recently.

Now that I know that Nikon has this tremendous DR advantage I have a total blockade.

I can´t shoot a single frame anymore. Most certainly the meagre DR will ruin this shot and anyway it won´t look half as good as when made with a Nikon and all my friends will ask me when looking at my holidays, dog, cat, kids and treetrunks pics, hey, what´s wrong with your camera, the pics all look like sh... and also the highlights are all totally blown and the shadows totally blocked on this incredible shot of the bumper of your car at high noon yesterday!

Man, I need 50 MP and 20 stops DR right now, or I´m totally doomed!

If only I already had a Nikon instead of a 7 stops poop slide film when I went to Italy the other year!

Poop slide film
Poop slide film

---------------------------------------------
Waldemar
www.pbase.com/haak
Click to expand...


--
www.dylikowski.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top